Apparently no one told American politicians that America is at war

[malaise]

with Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen and on and on and on and on.

Stop the fucking wars if you really care about the killing of innocents.

[DetlefK]

1. You are saying that the US should stop fighting ISIS and the Taliban?

[raven mad]

4. Remember the old commercial?

You asked for it, you got it............

Never quit, but fix the situation we caused in the first place. Ask Ronnie RayGuns............

[DetlefK]

6. You cannot undo the past. Gone is gone. There is only present and future.

[malaise]

45. Do you remember who coined that absolutely offensive phrase

'collateral damage'?

Which idiot screamed about crusades with regard to Iraq?

Looks like the imperial lunatics really thought they would be greeted with garlands of flowers.

Stop the fucking wars.

[seabeckind]

9. Yes. Just walk away.

Can't even be a Pyrrhic victory.

No victory at all. It's a loser.

Only winning move is not to play.

[DetlefK]

11. Are you willing to accept the consequences of walking away?

[seabeckind]

13. I've been forced to accept the consequences

of a stupid failing policy to this point.

We've been following the Bush, neocon doctrine for 16 years.

How much longer do democrats keep chasing that wild goose?

[DetlefK]

24. Just answer the question. Yes or No?

Are you willing to accept the responsibility for the things that will happen if the US follows your demand and stops fighting ISIS and the Taliban?

Yes or No?

[atreides1]

30. Could you be more specific

As to what responsibility?

Thank you.

[DetlefK]

34. What if the US leaves ISIS alone and ISIS kills more people than they already are?

Are the "walk-awayers" here ready to face responsibility for the consequences of the very thing that they demanded?

[Albertoo]

40. Some here prefer to be on the side of the angels: never a war, whatever the consequences

(this is not to say that GW didn't enter one of the most counter productive wars in the history of mankind)

[malaise]

44. The US and her allies created ISIS and this mess

Here listen to this - it is the essential problem on the planet

[NuclearDem]

69. No, because they're not going to be the ones who have to deal with the consequences.

Congress in the 1980s decided post-Soviet Afghanistan wasn't worth rebuilding, and as a result, we got al-Qaeda, the Taliban, the destruction of countless World Heritage sites, and the roots of modern Islamist terrorism.

I'm 27. I'll have to live with these consequences for decades. The "not my problem" crowd is going to screw my generation.

[melman]

12. What happens then?

ISIS just stops doing what they're doing? You can't possibly believe that.

[seabeckind]

14. Nice strawman.

Really cool leap of logic you did there.

[uhnope]

16. no, it's the next rational question

you could at least answer it if you're serious

[seabeckind]

19. It's your next question.

I'm not going to follow you down that rabbit hole.

[DetlefK]

25. Are you saying that you don't care about the consequences of your demand?

[Nitram]

33. Seabeckind, you seem to prefer deflecction to engaging in real discussion.

"Just walking away" is a decision with consequences. Those consequences include allowing ISIL to expand their influence over more lives, open more prisons for torture and execution of innocents, and genocidal attacks on entire communities. Sticking our head in the sand will not change the fact that walking away would have far worse consequences than our continuing to support Iraq and Syrian rebels in the fight against ISIL and Al Qaeda.

[Bragi]

32. Walking away would entail one additional step

Speaking purely as a speculative matter, if the US wants to walk away from the mess in the Middle East (ME), then I think it needs to do something else after walking -- it would need to militarily and virtually wall off the entire region so that no-one within gets out, and the Muslim nations and peoples behind the wall are forced to deal directly with, and defeat, jihadism and ISIS. Or not, their choice.

It isn't hard to imagine where the line would need to be drawn (likely Turkey's border with Europe) nor is there an absence of military and civilian technology available to create a functioning (virtual) "wall" between the west and the Muslim ME. I'd give Muslims living outside the wall the right to a one-way ticket across the wall if they want to go in there to live with, or fight, jihadists, as they wish. If they don't choose to take up that offer, then they are, of course, entitled to and welcome to stay on our side.

When and if the ME muslim leaders behind the wall get their act together and defeat jihadism, then we can negotiate the re-normalization of relations, and taking down the wall. If they don't or can't accomplish this, then life will go on for us, and the wall will remain in place.

Oh yeah, Israel, it would be behind the wall. I'd suggest to Israelis and their leaders that they get serious about something they seem to have overlooked for the last 50 years -- striking a deal that will give them and their neighbours peace. If that's not possible for them to accomplish, I would offer all Israeli citizens the most generous resettlement program in human history.

/end of speculative proposal

[seabeckind]

39. Ahh, new blood (so to speak)

"militarily and virtually wall off the entire region so that no-one within gets out"

is NOT walking away.

It is remaining actively engaged in the internal conflicts within that region.

Let me know when you get the details worked out... especially the one where the US inserts its forces into yet another sovereign country and what the ramifications of that might be.

[Bragi]

42. Perhaps I misunderstand you

The idea of putting up a wall is to isolate the bad guys, and to force the good guys behind the wall to take out the bad guys behind the wall. No further US military intervention would be needed (or wanted) behind the wall.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. I don't think building a wall around an entire region is prudent or moral.

I don't think building a wall around an entire region is prudent or moral.

Also, there are more Muslims living outside the Middle East than living in it.


A more prudent path is to focus on the bad guys.

[Bragi]

43. Doesn't matter that more Muslims live outside than within the ME

I don't have a problem with the overwhelming majority of Muslims who peacefully live in the west. They go about their lives just fine without me worrying about them. The bad guys in our midst we can deal with, once the jihadist terror from the ME now being inflicted on the west is halted. Stop the movement of people over the wall, and I think we can resolve deal with the bad guys here in due course. And I think the people in the ME, on the other side of the wall, most of whom are not jihadists, will, in time, on their own, deal forcefully nd successfully with their bad guys, as only they can.

[7962]

20. No, the LAST time we "left", ISIS easily took over a huge part of Iraq & Syria

"Strawman" hell, his question is a valid one.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. "Western civilization is at war." -Newt Gingrich

If those of us on the left don't fashion a response that is supported by a plurality or majority of Americans war mongers like Newt Gingrich and his ilk will.

[malaise]

46. That simple n/t

[bvar22]

62. So, how good are we doing?

We've been "at war" with "The Taliban" (we created and armed) for over 15 years.
Looks like we are just making MORE "insurgents" every day.
Can you point to ANY "progress" we have made in the last ten years with our wars?

Do you know there are 1.5 BILLION Muslims in the World?

Should we just try to kill them all?

Out NOW.
This is not our problem.

[billhicks76]

2. Thank You

We created this mess. I used to like this old cartoon. It was an American General with a bunch of el salvadoran corpses on a plate. The text was, " how you you say you didnt order this...you paid for it". Same old shit. War is evil. And so are the things we did to make people want to fight us. Can you imagine your entire family being murdered and not wanting to do something about it? Hello? That's what I thought.

[DetlefK]

8. And how will abandoning this mess make the situation better?

[seabeckind]

15. How will continuing to do the same thing that's failed to this point

make the situation better?

Other than the bottom line of the war merchants and the jihadists who need an example of something to hate.

They will hate no matter what. They've been playing that little game for a couple thousand years.

You can't change that.

[uhnope]

17. so let the jihadists organize, amass weapons, and plan

that's your proposal?

[seabeckind]

18. What are you talking about?

They are doing those things anyway.

I have no proposal other than to walk away.

What's the definition of insanity again?

[uhnope]

21. Does it ever occur to you that

maybe the situation now could be much worse, if the west wasn't fighting the terrorists in the world, if the west was letting every terrorist cell meet and plan and move weapons around?

Obviously, both are arguments are counterfactual; we don't know what would happen if the facts were different. But these insane extremists don't need any excuses to massacre people, and less extremists mean less attacks.

[DetlefK]

26. And what will happen AFTER walking away?

[billhicks76]

56. We Were The Biggest Terrorists For Decades

Quite a pickle we have created. We actually supported ISIS in Syria. Why? Because more important for us to steal geopolitical power there than care about casualties. That's what people don't get. We don't care and never have.

[DetlefK]

66. The US supported ISIS? You've been reading too much RT.

[billhicks76]

68. Yes We Did

In Syria many of the rebels we supported to topple Assad were affiliated with ISIS. I read to much RT? Maybe you don't read at all.

[DetlefK]

70. HAHAHA! Link or it didn't happen.

[malaise]

67. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

We're saints don't yah know that.

[7962]

22. How many of these major attacks have been by people who lost their family?

Any?
This latest one was Tunisian; when did "we" start attacking tunisia?
They're not screaming "Remember the Alamo" they're screaming "Alluah Akbar"

[billhicks76]

63. You're Wrong

Don't be so simplistic. In Iraq alone one million people at least lost a family member. If close to a million actually died then that number increases ten fold. Those are who started ISIS when we broke up the Iraq Army and splintered the Sunnis. Those who sympathize with them and commit terrorist attacks feel the pain of their persecuted people like throughout history. Just because some mentally ill wannabes or copycats commit crimes doesn't change facts on the ground.

[7962]

64. Sorry, the statement was made that attacks could be revenge for losing family.

Its not simplistic to ask WHICH of the many attackers committed the attack because they lost family.
Its not revenge, its attacking to further their stated goal. They state they are retaking Europe and all must surrender to them. They want their caliphate
Europe has been ignoring whats coming for too many years; throwing their doors open to the worst the world has to offer. They're seeing the error of their "tolerance" now.
We're making the same mistakes here; acting like these criminals are no different than any others. the result will be the same if we continue to ignore REALITY

[billhicks76]

65. Not Quite Right

Some fringe extremists want that but they would get nowhere without the devastation we brought them as there are always crazy fundamentalists. We have our own right here that would like nothing more than to institute a radical Christian theocracy that hangs gays in the streets and weeds out non-believers. And if we were getting bombed and invaded my foreign governments they could possibly gain a foothold too. People like that get support when people are desperate and demolished.

[malaise]

47. Precisely

Look how many people were killed and continue to be killed in our names and they dehumanize them and called them collateral damage.
Enough is fucking enough!!

[raven mad]

3. Amen, sir.

Amen.

[malaise]

48. Female poster here

[raven mad]

58. Wasn't being derogatory, just have had no sleep!

I know you're a girl - LOL! Brain fart...............

[malaise]

59. It's OK

[uhnope]

5. What appalling BS. Je Suis Charlie

To blame the USA for the attack on Nice? And you couldn't even wait for the body to get cold.

Shame on you

[seabeckind]

7. Nonsense. The OP said nothing of the sort.

It was talking about the fake outrage by politicians.

Blame has nothing to do with it.

[Cosmocat]

23. Jesus

We are reaching a breaking point with this crap that it injecting steroids into our stupid.

The same asshole Republicans who snidely have dismissed and demeaned France now, out of deranged partisanship, are saying we have to go to "war" in great part because of terrorist attacks in France.

It is muddled and poisoned thinking, and for good measure might be the element that gives Trump an avenue to actually win the election, because this country is THAT stupid.

If we have a for real ISIS attack here, not one of this would bes who are latching on from the internet, if we have some kind of 9-11 type planned and orchestrated attack by muslims here, it IS going to be POTUS Trump, and just more of these iincidents and any more lone wolf type incidents here are very problematic in this way.

[melman]

10. Standard operating procedure for that poster

Never fails to find a way to deflect blame from the terrorists that actually commit these atrocities.

[uhnope]

29. to deflect blame from the terrorists that actually commit these atrocities

= a good summary of the intent of the regressives

[RoccoR5955]

28. Hey look.

In case you forgot, Dubya went to war with Iraq, and it destabilized the region. He also failed to listen to his briefing which stated that they were going to use planes on 9/11 to attack the US. Why was this attack waged? If you read the history, it is because US troops were in Muslim Holy Lands. Had the troops not been there, 9/11 probably would not have happened, Shrub would not have attacked and destabilized Iraq, and ISL would not have been formed.
Using all that unimpeachable logic, the US is to blame for ANY AND ALL attacks by ISL.

Appalling, yes. Bullshit, NO WAY!

[uhnope]

31. that's so sick I thought you were being sarcastic at first. Or....are you?

you actually blame 9/11 on the US?

This reads like a sick joke:

Using all that unimpeachable logic, the US is to blame for ANY AND ALL attacks by ISL.

Please tell me you're joking.

BTW the US did pull its bases from Saudi Arabia, which was Osama Bin Laden's excuse. Did the attacks stop?

Oh, and how many attacks has OBL coordinated Obama since removed that ass from the planet? Hmm maybe that was actually an effective way to deal with these assholes.

[RoccoR5955]

38. I am far from joking.

Look at it, and you shall see. The US pulled bases from Saudi Arabia AFTER they destabilized Iraq. Once Iraq was destabilized, and the Baath Party was totally taken out, and had nothing to do, the early forming of ISL was started. Attacks did not stop, not because we pulled troops from Saudi Arabia, attacks did not stop because the US did not stop killing innocent people in the Middle East.

I suppose that you are one of the folks who want to just turn the entire region, except for Israel, to glass.
It would not surprise me one bit, if you fail to see the how and why of ISL.

[citood]

51. We can't be blamed for a group's over-reaction

"it is because US troops were in Muslim Holy Lands. Had the troops not been there, 9/11 probably would not have happened"

Did we invade Saudi Arabia? Of course not. Any troops we had in Saudi Arabia in September 2001 were there with the permission (and likely invitation) of the Saudi Arabian government. How are we responsible for this inciting a group to commit mass murder.

We also have troops in South Korea, by invitation of the Korean government. There are actually a lot of people in Korea who don't want our military there anymore...and they protest the 'old fashioned' way with peace marches and the political process. If they decided to short circuit the process and slaughter 5,000 Americans, I certainly wouldn't blame myself.

BTW, we probably have a marine or two at the embassy in Saudi Arabia...does Al Quaeda still have permission to kill me because of this?

[RoccoR5955]

54. Thanks for your comparison

of apples to oranges. It is noted.

[citood]

55. Lucy, you'll have to 'splain to me why its apples and oranges

Just because Al Quaeda is more upset about it than Koreans?

That would be a terribly weak argument.

[RoccoR5955]

57. If I have to explain it to you

I would probably get banned from the site.
Leave it to say, that I have stated my point. You can agree with the facts, or believe your own mythology.
One more insult from you, and I shall put you on ignore, with the rest of them.

[citood]

61. Where did I insult you?

And if not believing we deserved to be attacked on 9-11 is "mythology" to you, I just might hit that ignore button first.

[RoccoR5955]

27. But we need the wars.

They are essential to our economy. After all, the only thing that is made here are weapons of war.

[malaise]

53. Naailed it and with the collapse of ths Soviet union we needed another

ism with ists hence the preoccupation of the warmongers with a religion as ideology. It's all bullshit in the name of selling weapons,and the non-stop looting and plundering of resources everywhere on the planet.
The West barely mentions the humans we kill - just shove them into the 'collateral damage' column until the dead are on our side.


Fuck the fucking wars.

[seabeckind]

35. I do believe this thread has been hijacked.

I guess it's no longer about our US politicians who got us into this mess and keep us there.

It's become the rallying cry for those who held the banners for that movement.

And with that, I'll be on my way.

[malaise]

50. They do it on every thread that asks them to think

They're as predictable as high temperatures in July.

[Albertoo]

37. So do you suggest letting Milosevic, Saddam, Bachar and Qaddafi kill 100,000's of Muslims?

Just asking.

[malaise]

49. How many have been killed in your name

by your government and their allies? Start there.

[Doctor_J]

52. It's taken for granted now

It will be big news if we are ever again NOT at war